if ♪ to the oceans white with foam ♪ ♪ god bless america ♪ ♪ my home sweet home ♪ fors ♪ god bless america ♪ note my home sweet home ♪ ♪♪ >> the country and world changed on june 24th. >> with the overturn of the roe and dobbs decision -- >> on wnesday federal reserve chair jerome powell will hold a committee to discuss interest rates and monetarpolicy at 2:30 p.m. on c-span, c-span now, our free mobile app or online at

c-span.org. >> c-span, democracy unfiltered, funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? no, it's way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with a thousand community centers to create wi-fi enabled lift zones so students from low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports span as a public service along with ese other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> up next we'll hear from industry officials testifying on the u.s. freight network before a house subcommittee. they discuss safety regulations, federal funding, use of artificial intelligence to detect hazards and the supply chain. this is just under three hours.

>> good morning. >> good morning. >> nice to meet you.

[indiscernible conversations] >> subcommittee on rails, platforms and materials come to order.

i ask the chair be authorized to declare a recess any time in today's hearing. i also ask unanimous consent that the members not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit on the subcommittee and ask questions. so ordered. a reminder if members wish to insert a document in the record, please also email it to documentsti@e. mail.gov. i recognize myself for an opening statement for five minutes. chairman webster chairman webster: since the 19th century and railroads started operating, railroads have shaped history and development. as america grew, more dependent on railroadings and transportation, rail became the very first industry to be

regulated by the federal government under the interstate commerce act of 1887. railroads remain an integral part of our system as well as relying on dependable rail service. america's freight and rail network is widely considered the largest, safest, and most efficient system in the world. spanning nearly 340,000 miles of track, the essential network annually moves 1.6 billion tons of goods americans rely upon to survive. the moderate success of freight railroads largely traces back to the passage of staggers act of 1980, which deregulated the industry and allowed for

unprecedented growth. since then staggers were signed into law and moving freight by rail has become cheaper and safer, ensuring the industry continues to grow without excessive and unnecessary government burdens is a key consideration that should be factored into any action towards freight rail taken by congress or the executive branch. this hearing will focus on america's freight rail network, it will also touch upon improving and constructively growing inner city passenger rail to best serve america's needs, as your rail works best where demand is high. competition and private sector involvement are ample and a dependence on government support is low. amtrak must look at improving and maintaining its existing

network and wean off government support and provide competitive and safe service to attract riders. amtrak should serve as an appealing option for travel, not a replacement for vehicles and airplanes which remains the overwhelming preference for americans. as you know, the current service transportation authorization expires this congress, and this committee has begun assessing the nation's infrastructure needs. many have worked on surface authorization legislation and will require us to be both principalled and pragmatic. building and supporting america's rail network involves cutting the red tape and improving safety through technology and improving innovation and encouraging private sector involvement and competition and decreasing dependence on government funding and control. so with that, i'd like to introduce our witnesses that are joining us today, ian jeffries,

president and c.e.o. from the american association of railroads, tuck baker, american short line regional railroad association, joe daloiso, the chair national railroad construction and maintenance association, and jerod cassidy, alternate safety -- national safety and legislative director, smart t.d. i recognize ranking member titus for five minutes. and good to be back together and we'll see what happens here. sen. titus: i look forward to working with you and other members of the subcommittee to make subject the matters related to railroads, pipelines and hazardous materials.

rep. titus: there's a lot of work to be done to compare for the surface re-authorization so we can be sure to find a way to maintain ongoing investments for rail and pipeline safety projects. we don't want them to get lost in the highway shuffle. las vegas is my district and was founded as a rail stop initially. and right now, right through my district, right through downtown las vegas, we have a number of trains every day carrying all kinds of things. now, also, with we're at the forefront of high speed passenger rail with the bright line and that's going 218-mile route that has tremendous potential for economic development all across the southwest not just in nevada that's going to create thousands of good paying union jobs. brightline west is going to provide passenger rail service between los angeles and las

vegas and turn a 4-hour drive on a good day into a reliable 2-hour ride. fully electrified and reduce emissions and relieve traffic and provide travelers a fast and more fun way to get to their destination which we hope is las vegas. brightline was the first of its kind with all 13 rail unions. they all use labor, operation and maintenance and this is quite an accomplishment. it is one of the most exciting rail projects in the country. i was proud to support investments in the infrastructure law that made this public-private partnership a reality. the project was awarded $3 billion in federal-state

partnership. that's a mouthful but going to include $9 billion in private investments. in addition to brightline we see a number of freight shipments that move by rail and that includes hazardous tells and i have concerns about those as trains get longer and longer. not only do we have to be mindful of train length but our workers and first responders know what is moving on those trains. congress require the pipeline and hazardous materials administration to inform workers and first responders in real-time after an accident occurs so they know what they are dealing with. i am pleased the previous administration was able to get this requirement finalizedded in june, 2024 and first responders

need the information they need when they respond and the communities are prepared to deal with rail incidents. d.o.t. indicated his support for their requirement during his confirmation hearings and i hope we can hold him to that and get rail safety legislation that contains a number of important safety improvements across the finish line in this congress. i thank our witnesses who are here today for their time and look forward to hearing the information. and with that, i yield back. will bees. mr. webster: i recognize the ranking member of the full

committee. has helped millions of jobs. the jobs with wages are driving unemployment rate while modernizing our infrastructure including our rail infrastructure. it makes it hard, this is why it makes it hard that they signed an executive order to halt this progress. and put it at risk with one section of one of these executive orders. halting the flow of benefits already approved by congress is a strange way to law enforcement officer the golden age of infrastructure. we need to continue these investments in all modes and as

we discuss today at rail. let's keep it going. d.i.l. provided funding. for the first time since the founding of amtrak they have guaranteed funding. it allows amtrak to address maintenance and begin construction on long delayed projects. they would have to wait until congress continued the annual appropriations process. this that is no way to run a railroad. it has invested for 594 projects to improve rail safety and expand passenger rail. in my state, the cascade yeah ground transportation project advanced phase 2 of the corridor and development program. it will connect communities throughout and vancouver, b.c., seattle and portland and connect workers to jobs and increase

access to housing and offer greater ways for almost 10 million people to get around the northwest. the federal-state partnership for inner city passenger rail is matching billions of dollars in private and state investment. public investment is vital to building the true international rail system. the f.r.a. released a report in support of long distance service and incorporates feed whack from 50,000 stakeholder and public comments. amtrak will need new equipment to address these needs. we have an obligation to ensure rail travel is safe for people and safe for goods and safe for communities. i welcome the highest priority

and look forward to reducing accidents and save lives. class one freight rail accidents have not improved over the last 10 years. in my state, 202 train accidents and 21 railroad right of way fatalities and a derailment that spilled diesel in the indian reservation in march of 2023. a major cause is longer trains. there is a report detailing the risk posed by long trains. these trains and subject to in train forces that can make it challenging for an engineer to control. i am certain people express concerns with longer and longer trains citing derailments. we are working on those in my

districts. and these types of grants are available through f.r.a. and any member of congress' district to apply for. i want to end every one wants to have a safe rail across the country. and i am committed to building on the successes and ensure that this committee can say america builds rail at hearings for many years to come. i thank the witnesses for being here and look forward to discussion. i yield back. >> i ask unanimous consent that the full committee -- full

statements of the witnesses be included without objection, so ordered. and unanimous consent the record of today's hearing remain open until such time the witnesses have time. without objection. so ordered. i ask unanimous consent that the record remain open for 15 days for additional comments or information submitted by members or witnesses to be included in the record. without objection, so ordered. written testimony has been made part of the record. the committee asks that you don't go over five minutes. mr. duffy, you are recognized. >> chairman webster, ranking member titus, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the topic of surface transportation re-authorization. i serve as the president and c.e.o. of the association of american railroads. we represent the nation's major

freight railroads. i'm honored to discuss the policies needed to support continued. railroads are cornerstone operating a network of over 140,000 miles. it is safe and economically vital and privately funded. unlike other transportation modes, freight railroads base their infrastructure without federal funding. since 1980, the industry has invested $690 billion in private capital, over $1.1 trillion in today's dollars in maintaining and improving our network. that is $23 billion per year or $442 million every week every year. this is unmatched in the transportation sector and ensures that railroads are a reliable backbone in the supply chain and tracks one-to-one with

safety. last decade has been the safest in rail history. last year was safer than the year before and the year before that. significant declines in train accidents, employee injuries. led by employee commitment railroads lead industries safer than trucking and safer than airlines and airlines, construction and agriculture to name a few. yet, our work in the space is never finished. economically freight rail supports every industry moving 1.5 billion tons of goods. billions annually and enhances u.s. global competitiveness. 42% below where they were in 1980, we are an ally in the

fight against inflation and our environmental impact. freight rail is three to four more times efficient. reduce greenhouse gas emissions. as the demand for transportation grows, railroads are positioned to meet continuing challenges and makes good-byes sense to be more efficient. as fuel is the largest cost. as this committee begins the next surface transportation bill we encourage to uphold our ability to invest in infrastructure, support innovation and advance data safety improvements. we urge outcome space for automatic track inspections and improve safety outcomes that have been hindered that mandate. and nimble approach would allow them rile enhancing rigor rouse safety standards.

if a policy cannot be said, what problem it is solving, i question its validity. congress should address the insolvensy of the highway trust fund. without legislative action, it will face insolvensy and accumulating a deficit. only increasing reliance on general fund transfers like $118 billion. re-authorization must reject calls to increase truck size and weight limits which would exacerbate degrade roads and increase congestion on our highways and create a competitive imbalance. additionally programs such as the railroad crossing elimination grant program are in collaboration to improve crossing safety. commonsense permitting reforms can put dollars.

great railroads will continue supporting the economy and driving growth through investment and innovation and look forward to working with this committee to ensure the policies enacted in the re-authorization and enable the freight industry to drive safety, efficiency and economic growth. i look forward to your questions. mr. webster: mr. baker, you are recognized for five minutes. >> i'm chuck baker, president of the short line association representing the nation 600 small class two and three small railroads. we move industrial, agricultural and energy products between ports, factories and farms and the larger class one railroads. the class one sold those lines

to local entrepreneurs. they didn't have much traffic and weren't in great shape. but the local folks were eager to make a go of it. they ran efficiently, focused on getting one customer or car load and bent over backwards and it worked. short lines are critical and ensure that the goods your constituents rely upon get to their homes and businesses safely and we manage 50,000 miles of track and touch 1/5 of all car loads and 6% of the industry's total revenue. short lines and small businesses we have a large impact. we operate in 49 states, support 478,000 jobs and produce $56 billion in value added to the economy. for decades, members of this subcommittee have supported policies that allowed short lines to survive and thrive.

almost one of you has a short line. florida midland. congressman garcia has 9. congressman westerman has 15. congressman begich where short lines is one of the short lines in the entire state. the title of this hearing is america builds and short lines are eager to build. the next surface transportation re-authorization bill will have a long-term impact on the country. our top priority is funding for the chris yes program that short lines are eligible for and transformational. 240 chris yes grants are awarded. they simply wouldn't have been possible. with march approaching, it helps get them off of the bubble and

into the big dance. short line. small towns in rural communities. the air is cleaner and streets are less congested. and here's one example. the plant manager of a wood panel processing facility in northeast michigan said lake side state way service is competitive despite our remote location. and allowed to redues our cost and ensure our long-term success. chris yes needs advanced appropriations to continue to be most effective and long-term investment investments certainty and predict are crucial. to make it more effective, we need to speed up the process. good options include batch processing of nepa exclusions,

preaward authority or setting deadlines. this program can move faster with no additional risk and that would be good for america to build. on the safety and regulatory front i ask tay the committee keep the big picture in mind. rail is the safest mode of transportation. any new regulation should be focused on solving problems and be practical for short fund railroads. for short line the biggest derailment comes from broken rail and wide gauge and invest in the track and chris yes already does. finally, i ask the congress not increase the size of weight of

trucks. we are joined by a broad coalition of cities, counties, police, first respond hers, labor organizations and highway safety groups in that request. for railroads, trucks are direct competition and don't pay fair share of highway maintenance and shift to truck and end up with bigger trucks. thank you. mr. webster: our next witness. >> good morning chairman websters. i'm track division manager of railroad construction company or r.c.c. and i serve as chairman of the board of the national railroad construction and maintenance association or n.r.c.

i congratulate chairman graves as chairman. and chairman webster and ranking member titus for your new positions. mr. webster: could you mike move. >> the n.r.c. advances the mutual interests of railway contractors and pliers to construct, maintain and supply both freight and passenger railroads. i am a third generation railroader. my grandfather built track and established the company i worked for. my father served in the army corps of engineers who began building america infrastructure towards the end of the korean war. multi generations all follow along this path. building rail runs in my blood. as i like to say we are not just in this industry, i view this industry as a family.

my company r.r. krferlt has a legacy on providing railroads on the eastern united states. our member companies generate 100,000 jobs supplying building and maintaining, freight and passenger. our members are small businesses so we focus on safely delivering quality goods and services for our railroad customers and doing so in a safe and efficient manner. they provide every type of infrastructure work and serve every railroad and inner city passenger rail systems. contractors played an invaluable role in industrial shippers in the southeastern united states respond to damages respond to hurricanes helene and milton and we expect that condition to

continue. as this committee begins the process of re-authorizing surface transportation programs, the n.r.c. suggest what will help america build. we would like to see robust funding for grant programs. the ijaa made impacts including unprecedented levels for rail programs spending on infrastructure especially rail infrastructure is a sound investment that pays dividends throughout our economy, supply chain. the n.r.c. supports funding at increased levels that improve efficiency, safety and environmentally freight and transportation rail. the grant program is a source of funding to address key safety projects. cutting red tape. and there are levels of funding

for grant programs which had been critical to improving the freight supply chain and improving passenger rail in the u.s. the speed which they have been executed is too slow. we encourage congress to deliver grant funding in a more expedient manner. support increased competition. the n.r.c. have opportunities for contracting out and opportunities to stretch federal funds further. this is not an attempt. rather it is intended to help the industry as a whole to perform more work more efficiently. our members are to find ideas and methods to deliver projects without compromising safety. separately but related there have been insertion of language.

this would make it hard to expand the passenger system. who naisht and deploy safety technologies. we urge congress and place excessive mandates. the n.r.c. supports maintaining federal truck size and weight maximums to ensure safety and and have not been data driven and benefits despite of being cumbersome. many times undo paperwork or small businesses. through this seems to be a top priority for every

transportation re-authorization bill. permitting process for rail projects moves way too slow and and review processes in order to deliver critical infrastructure projects. thank you for this opportunity to share my perspectives and i look forward to any questions.

over the last couple of decades. there is still much work that needs to be done. we are enjoying the robust funding in amtrak. no surprise that 2024 was a record year for ridership. not only were people able to enjoy benefits but were directly equipped their citizens and work to medical care with fewer cars on the highways. amtrak cannot survive alone. adequate funding is so important. not just funding that is needed but legislative and regulatory support to protect the workers and riders. a train, platform is threatened while trying to perform the functions. it is not uncommon for conductors to be punched on, spit on or worse.

unlike aviation, rail statutes to handle bad actors. an assaulter once detained is forced to disembark the trainor they are permitted to wait on the platform and board the next train expanding the threat. our members main priority is to perform the functions of their job to the best of their ability. and they take pride in moving passengers and freight and proud to see a job well done. there is so much internal conflict because workers are being add to do more with less. training in the freight rail side industry is abysmal. while some positive changes have been made, the reality, carriers are focused on the shortest

path. and detectors are going on and off like a switch. and continues to creep up. and indicator of the dangers of long trains. in yard accidents are becoming a serious concern. the answer does not lie in new technology. it lies in the steadfast commitment to achieving the safest. it is not safer because it is technological but people make the difference. president trump acknowledged his support in the fight against

automation. labor should not be viewed as adversaries. we are the key to success. and this is the richest era. and best qualified to the performed inspections and all of the craft workers that drive to achieving the safest course. the only way to gather or interpret data is to do so transparency with all stakeholders having a seat at the table. the workers are best suited to speak to the truths and effects of the consistencies and the data. innovation should absolutely be considered but not for the sake of safety. there is no one better suited to

drive every effort towards safety than labor. our mission is simple and does not waiver. safety will always lead the way. we stand to work with you to get us there. i thank you for the opportunity. mr. webster: thank you very much. now turn to questions from the panel. i recognize myself for five minutes. first question goes to mr. jeffries and mr. baker. the purpose of safety regulations would be to achieve safety outcome in the most efficient means possible. most of our regulations are prescriptive in our approach how could the industry in a performance based approach while allowing operators flexibility as to how those standards are achieved. >> thank you for the question.

we are a 200-plus-year-old industry and federally regulated industry. and we've got the code of federal regulations to support that. we still have regulations on the books from the steam engineer, over 50 years old, what that results in when they are not updated and do not evolve with innovation and technology is lock you in to a backwards operating process. and when you think about regulations, i think we agree thinking about the outcome you are seeking, safety out come versus the input you are providing. outcomes base regulation you set a standard and allow for utility am ways to achieve that standard and allowic new investments in

technology and innovation and new operating practices that can achieve if not exceed that standard. >> i'd add the difference between short lines and class ones illustrates your point. a regulation that would work for a 20,000 fortune 500 company with 13 different unions makes no sense with one locomotive and one union. common sense would tell you a performance based outcome than a prescriptive government telling you how to do it. >> anyone else want to comment on that? >> thank you for the question. what i will add is the labor supports the idea of

performance-based regulations in as much what we are trying to achieve is done safely. we have a lot of regulations that look backward but how we achieve the safety is regulations and make sure we have the guidelines to get us there. please rest assured labor supports technology and innovation to help us work safely. the umbrellas is not too big so when the technologies are being developed because the impact could be greater. these are new ideas and new things and we need to make sure we have the right processes in place. labor stands ready to work we need to play a role in these innovations because we are the ones most impacted by it and protect the public and impact them. when we look forward to a new process for regulations, sift has got to lead.

we can't say technology is safer. we have to make sure what we're doing is right. [indiscernible] >> describe the importance of permitting reform to maintain robust and safety, infrastructure networks. you want to take that one. >> i would be happy. it's a cleche a but very true. time is money. permitting reform, when projects are delayed, when they are delayed, scope gets reduced. communities feel the benefits sooner. for most short line projects, they are quite simple and involve track rehab in an

existing right of way and obvious that a project is not going to have no significant environmental impact and we spend a year or more in an elaborate box checking exercise and let's just get to it. mr. webster: that's the end of my time. i recognize ms. titus. ms. titus: hear about safety today and it is a priority. mr. cassidy you said transportation workers are the backbone of our infrastructure system and i certainly agree with that. we need to mb sure they can perform their duties in a knowledgeable way and safety way. understand that participated in

nine national safety board investigations last year. with all the emphasis on safety why are conductors getting hurt. is there anything we can do about it that might be helpful? >> thank you for the question. that is a loaded question. why are our members still getting hurt on the job is a multitude of reasoning. i would start with training. when i was hired on the railroad, i started as a conductor and promoted to locomotive engineer. our training i had to pay 6,000 to hire on with the railroad and today you get a bonus for taking the job. the emphasis was on training and go through a regimented school of six weeks and six months of training. the way the training programs

work in the regulatory world is that the railroads are required to develop programs and submit those programs to f.r.a. but there is so much freedom, the way they are approved they are able to make adjustments without any oversight whatsoever. and what we are seeing today is training that is being rushed through in high levels and in six weeks you see from hire to working as a conductor. there is not an incident that we had the opportunity to investigate with the ntsb that training did not have a role in that. you look at the practices, the external pressures put on workers, you have a recipe for disaster. so there are a lot of things we can improve. but to make the answer short, we have to get back to taking on training, not forcing on

regulatory minimumses and doing what is required by the regulation and making sure folks are safe and aware of what's going on and what changes are being made. ms. titus: we should look at that as we move forward. i have had a number of members talked to me about locked crossings and long trains and the problems they cause in their communities. this committee was told last year they shouldn't act on any legislation until the report came out of the national academies of sciences on the problem of long trains. that was mandated by the bipartisan infrastructure law. has that report come out? >> i believe it may have, yes. ms. titus: september 17. so i would just ask you what is

in that report that says we now can act on to advance this problem? >> thank you for the question, if i could 2023 was the industry's all-time low in the rate of injuries. the class ones. 2024 we're still closing out that data. always more work to be done. when it comes to trains and train makeup, the medium train length of class one train right now 50% is about 5,000 feet and 90% are 10,000 feet and 99% are shorter. and train makeup is a subject of commodity mix.

and trains are built to be managed based on the capacity of the commodities being moved and the length of the train. looking at the train accident rate as we have seen in certain areas, trains grow longer, largely driven by the increase -- ms. titus: let's get to the report -- >> seen the rate decrease from 2022 to 23 to 2024. we continue to operate trains regardless of length and commodity mix. ms. titus: my question was about the report, what it said that congress could now act on about long trains. congress should empower regulatory agencies to address challenges by requiring railroads to put cars together in the safest regulation.

>> i'm going to have a couple of questions. mr. lamalfa: going to be based california resources board. as you know there was a petition and granted another waiver to set its own standards for loco motives the end use loco motive

regulation and required by 2030 -- so by 2030 only loco motive engines in 2008 or newer are available. so it could be that request would violate the clean air act which prohibits states from setting their own standards. [indiscernible] isn't technologically feasible. and withdrawn from now its application for e.p.a. for end use -- [indiscernible] please tell this committee what the impact would have been if e.p.a. had gone through with this rule and how any cost

increases basically hit the consumers. first, mr. jeffries and then mr. baker. >> what the impact of the rule would have been, for the two class one railroads in california, the annual cost would have been $800 million. so $1.6 billion collectively and the short lines have reported that at least 25% of their companies would be put out of business. we are gratified that they were drew their request to e.p.a. it was unlawful under the clean air act and the interstate committee termination act. the goals were laudible to move to further decrease emissions and something railroads continue to work on this day. mr. lamalfa: mr. baker. >> we were extraordinarily concerned about that waiver. you would not have thought that

carb could come up with a waiver that the e.p.a. wouldn't have approved but they have found one. so we were pleased when it was withdrawn. mr. lamalfa: they know they would go out of business. >> if short line railroads can't pass on costs to their customers, they would go out of business. and they left that in there. well, that's an ok result. and we found that pretty horrifying and shippers found that pretty horrifying -- mr. lamalfa: important in my area, ag products moving rice or other things in the area, wood from the mill and being able to

get it to the mill in a timely manner. tell me about this -- if president trump has come out on the side of not allowing this mandate to come forward. what if we have a change politically? and should we have a change in the laws to make certain that carb doesn't have the ability to get waivers in the future and just keep some continuity in the industry? >> i would say absolutely. what carb tried to do with regulations was in conflict with two existing laws but that needs further clarification. mr. lamalfa: mr. jeffries you testified about grade crossings. in rural areas, that's about

it. it's about 40 million bucks. so what do you see in that at grade elimination program? are we to put one in that is a split grade? we have this mess of high-speed rail that is going to cut off a lot of farms. touch on that, please. >> i think great crossing elimination is key and doesn't apply everywhere but in areas where you have a grade crossing, driver education is important so people know to look for trains that are oncoming and appropriate safety equipment at the crossing is a key safety attribute. the important thing is that folks understand when the drivers need to assume there is

a train coming and assume that is not happening before getting across the track. mr. lamalfa: lights, signals and arms and it becomes the darwin award. i yield back. >> one of the many executive orders this week froze hiring and infrastructure funding. considering that many infrastructure projects really get started in the spring, this timing was anything but good. in fact the federal highway administration had to shut down all payments because of this poorly drafted executive order. last evening, i, along with my team heard from the metro planning organization, our local one and they are concerned about

the damage this will do to infrastructure projects that are underway or at least soon to start. do you have any concerns about this new funding freeze damaging your priority objectives? and if so, please tell us how these executive orders will effectively hurt your progress. >> i would gee, congressman, the executive order was not real well worded. i think the initial one-day reaction was a blanket pause across all d.o.t. on all disbursements that memo that was posted last night clarified that it was only meant to deal with calling gene new deal and e.v. mandates. in reality after 36 hours of extreme concern, i don't think

million rail projects will be affected but it's probably a lesson and being careful with words. mr.carson: you know very well the great hoosier state, indiana, is the home to many thriving short line railroads which helps us live up to the hoosier nickname, the cross roads of america. what is working well in terms of short lines and your customers, what are the challenges ahead for this unique sector and how can this committee help you out? >> there are a lot of short lines in indiana. i believe four in your district alone. national poemion, defiance and western is a great example. 10 years ago there was a viral video showing a train moving down that track at five miles

per hour and wave and messy and called the worst railroad in america. that has received a grant and upgraded the infrastructure and doubled its customer base and moving faster and moving safer. good for the community, good for the state, good for the shippers. it is a fabulous success story. and again at the risk of hardshipping, the chrissie grant is transformational and lets them do projects that otherwise wouldn't be possible. krars. mr.carson: i yield back. >> i appreciate the appreciate

to discuss the passenger and freight network as we gear up for the surface and i have several priorities and i believe will increase safety. mr. jeffries, i want to commend you for your comments on the railroad crossing alimb nation grant program. i do believe we are of one mind, one mind that the safest crossing is the crossing that is not there. i believe labor supports it as well. i like to say see you greg and jarrett. as we work on the rail title, i will be advocating for that program and another one to modern the tank fleet, 21st century, telematics program that i offered will give shippers vital information about their

assets' health and information about where their products are in the rail network. i believe this information is the property of the tank car owners and must be shared with the operators in real-time as their goods are moving along the rail network. mr. jeffries, the allocation for the spectrum is a value annual opportunity for the railroads to enhance safety reliability and operational efficiency. class run railroads committed to comply by september of this year? they want to know by september of 2025. >> you are spot on with our shared views of that. we will comply and we are on schedule to comply and happy to

bring in those experts to sit down with you and your team. but that process is in place and we are moving forward. mr. nehls: will you inform the members of this committee if there are any issues with compliance? >> absolutely. mr. nehls: once the railroads are done, moving to the a block, can you share what the plans are to further develop that spectrum to show a continued commitment to safety and what the time frame the industry will need to achieve that? >> that's what we are developing right now. and when you look at spectrum use and what we have been able to build out along our network, we have a 54,000 5g moving on to tighter bands of spectrum and open up capacity and take us a backbone to new heights. mr. nehls: i will have followup

questions and i expect them to be answered. i would like to pivot about c3rs. what changes do they recommend to the reporting system to get the class one railroads to enroll in the program? if you remember, you said all the class ones would he enroll in this. >> it's a good discussion. two of the class ones have signed up to the program. we have long held views that edits need to be made to the program. when folks think about the ability to report, every railroad has a system in place. mr. nehls: let's get it done. i have a minute left. you testified before the senate commerce committee in 2023, then senator vance asked if 30 minutes was enough time?

and you said 30 seconds doesn't seem like enough long time. should there be a minimum time for inspections and if not, what do you recommend? >> no one size fits all. and while 30 seconds may not be a lot. there may be zero time. mr. nehls: let the record reflect vice president vance mandated two-person crew size. incoming secretary duffy who moved out of commerce committee by 238-0, confirmed, he would not pull back the two-man work rule. as a member of this committee, i support this rule. the idea that republicans will do whatever big business wants and not take into account the needs of the working men is outdated. i will say dog doesn't hunt. with that, i yield back.

mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i want to begin with the word of appreciation for the comments from my colleague from texas who has been a real parter on working to find good solutions for safety solutions and take the industry forward and improve safety for all and make the point to all of america that rail is a far safer way to transport things especially hazmat than trucks. and that point is lost on a lot of people. you talked about improving safety through technology and innovation. when the industry comes back to us and say you want to install default and put in telematics so every engineer on every train

knows the temperature of every wheel and can immediately respond to a problem and oh, by the way, it's not so bad that customers know where their car is, that's about taking the industry alford not back. mr. chairman, i would be remiss if i didn't mention that you talked about decreasing dependence on government funding for railroads. it's interesting you don't talk about dependence on funding for highways and airlines. you subsidized it to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars over the decades. it's interesting that the freight railroad system is asked to compete against this heavily subsidized alternative. and only transportation system in america that funds its own infrastructure through private sector, right? now president trump has instewedded this new department

of government efficiency and i think the idea is that the government should invest inefficiency and perhaps not subsidize inefficiency. so the only transportation system efficient enough is freight rail, then why are we spending billions and billions every year subsidizing highways and truckers? shouldn't we be investing inefficiency? does that make sense to you, mr. jeffries? >> 100%. >> you mentioned that amtrak should be off government support or that our highways and airlines should be off government support. you mentioned high-speed rail in your testimony. it's interesting that america is the only developed country in

the world not investing in high-speed rail. the challenge for anyone to think of another developed country. we are just barely starting. is that because there is some vast high-speed rail conspiracy that has affected every country on earth and hasn't hit the united states or does it make economic sense to invest in high-speed rail? >> it makes absolute sense. we fall short compared to other countries and one of the most advantageous opportunities is to expand the rail system in this country and high-speed rail is that opportunity and we support our on-board and see more rail for the citizens of this country. we need to capatalize on that. we need to accept there are no conspiracies out there.

as far as i'm aware of high-speed rail. some reason in this country, some people think of changing transportation and we have to get outside of that box. and make sure we are talking to folks and letting them what rail can do. mullet molt -- mr. moulton: rail is more efficient. one single train can take up the benefits go on. let's invest in efficiency. why does the rail industry have a reputation for being stojy and old-fashioned and doing things like mr. nehls and i described, investing in old-fashioned technology, instead of growing for the future? mr. jeffries: i would beg to differ. not surprisingly. look, we're a 200-year-old industry.

we're a willingsy industry. but i can assure you we're not your grandfather's railroad. we're not your father's railroad and tom's railroad's not going to be our railroad and innovation technology are that path forward. you talked about using detectors from the 1960's, that's why we're developing inspection portals, machine visions, acoustic bearing detectors, autonomous track inspection technology. all of that should be encouraged because there's a positive safety outcome. mr. moulton: i've lost my time. let's hope you do enough of that that it becomes the reputation of the industry. mr. jeffries: i'm with you on that. mr. moulton: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. mr. owens, you're recognized for five minutes. mr. owens: thank you. thank you for holding this hearing today, as the committee prepares for the re-authorization and of course i thank our guests. i'm thrilled to be a new member of this subcommittee. utah boasts arksz a rich, well history, hosting the completion of the transcontinental railroad

at the golden spike ceremony in 1869, a vision of a statewide inland port. our goal is to be the crossover of the west, a vital hub for freight ex change across the country in my position as vice chair of the education workforce, i applaud america's freight wells and using their own funds on capital expenditures and upkeep expenses. while much of our country's infrastructure lags behind, modern standards and needed upgrades, freight rail is at the tip of the spear in its innovation. with an average compensation of over 149,000 and a medium tenure of railroad employees of 13 years, this industry continues to be the place where people want to work, enjoy working, and supporting a family. as a member of the education workforce committee, i look forward toworking with you -- to working with you to better connect america's great talent to this essential industry.

mr. jeffries, from the workhorse perspective, what does your industry do differently and how can other industries struggling with stagnant wages and employment retention and low morale learn from the railroads? mr. jeffries: thank you for the question. you hit the nail on the head. our employees are the key reason we're able to serve america's communities and customers so well and do it at such a high level of safety and they deserve our thanks every day. mr. jefferies: and you're right that the average tenure for a rail employee is almost four times that of other industries. so we're very proud of that and we want to keep our folks, keep them online and that's why we have fourth generation railroaders working on our teams. so i would put a few different peelses together. one, we've worked very hard over the past few years to build a positive momentum with our employees.

whether that's scheduling agreements that provide a more predictable schedule for our operating crafts, to better plan their lives. whether it's negotiating outpaid sick benefits over which 93% of our employees now have, or whether it's getting a jump on collective bargaining so our employees don't have to wait several years before they get their additional pay increases. i'm very pleased that while the latest round of bargaining started just this past november, we already have five national agreements, fully ratified, in place, so the employees of those five unions know what their salary increases are going to be for the next five years, they know their health care is going to be almost half that, the cost of their health care is going to cost almost half that of the general population, and they know that they're going to get additional days off early in their careers. not to mention additional deals that have been donen a railroad by railroad basis, lock-in agreements as well. it's about listening to the employees, it's about understanding what their priorities are, again, we have a

new generation of railroaders coming on to the railroad. that have different priorities, different desires from what they want to see. and a lot of that's about work-life balance. and understandably being able to plan your life and schedule your life and be home for planned events. so that's a continuing effort. but i think that's a priority you hear from our executive level day in and day out and that resonates and we're seeing progress there. mr. owens: i mentioned earlier that the medium tenure of railroad employees 13 years, the private sector is three. so there's something that you're doing right for sure. i want to add just one other question. the efforts to cut red tape associated with -- has been successful in recent years. what more can be done to fast track routine maintenance in replacement construction projects without ignoring environmental and preservation concerns? mr. jefferies: a couple of different things. one, congress has already taken a huge step. in fact, taken it twice, when it directed the american council on

historic preservation to provide the same categorical exclusions to rail properties as it does highway properties when replacing old assets. however, they continue to ignore congress' direction. so they need another reminder. two, when replacing existing assets, same infrastructure, whether it's rail, whether it's bridges, one, limited reviews, of course. but also looking at the impact of that project. some of the things we've seen, also look at the impacts of the commodities that move over that project once complete. commodities, we have a common carrier obligation to move. to us, that's not part of an appropriate environmental review. we should be talking about the project itself, with set timelines and shot clocks. mr. owens: want to wrap up by saying, mr. cassity, we're going to do our best, education workforce, to prepare some of the greatest kids in our country for a great industry. so just know we're on top of that. we're going to make sure we're addressing it in a big way. thank you so much and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back.

ms. foushee. ms. foushee: thank you for holding this hearing. and thank you to the witnesses for being with us today. mr. jeffries, are railroads currently using artificial intelligence to perform safety inspections and if so, are they doing so in a wholly automated way or are these a.i. programs being monitored by or used in conjunction with railroad safety inspectors? mr. jefferies: so the short answer is yes, a.i. is being deployed. and when you think about what happens every day on the network, whether it's via detectors, sensors, other information, we gather immense amount of data about not only the operations, the safety, but the service of our network. and so the more data we continue to gather, we can use a.i. through predictive analytics to determine when a product might begin to show wear and tear based on historical performance.

or in a service standpoint, we might be able to further calibrate delivery windows so our customers can better have a sense of whether we're going to arrive, plan their work day, have their employees ready, and so there's myriad ways. but certainly there's always a human element to that. so, for example, if an inspection portal identifies a potential flaw in a train as it runs through it, that's when you have the employee then take a look at that and determine exactly what's going on and then if there's a need to fix it, have the employee go out and fix it. i would say we're very much in the embryonic stage of how a.i. might be able to be deployed but we're certainly using it and as a way to really conduct in depth analysis to what is a gargantuan amount of data we pull and will continue to pull. ms. foushee: secondly, i'm curious what standards, if any, a.a.r. has in place or is planning to put in place regarding the use of artificial

intelligence in railway safety. mr. jefferies: not only at the a.a.r. but also we have an i.g. company called rail link located in north carolina. i would say we're figuring out that path forward now. right now a.i., like i said, we're in the embryonic stages and as we mature practices, at the industry level, there's always an opportunity to compare best practices and determine maybe what the best use of information may be or how to best address any issues identified by technology might be. and so a.i.-specific, we don't have any sort of specific standard in place. but i would talk more about how technology plays into inspections, repairs, car repair, etc., absolutely we do. ms. foushee: thank you. mr. cassity, we just had a near shutdown of some of our nation's ports.

due to disagreement between labor and management over increased automation. from your perspective with smart t.d., in what ways do you see the freight railroad seeking to automate their safety work? mr. cassity: sure, thank you for the question, congresswoman. so a.i. is becoming a unique challenge in that, one, it's needed and it has its purpose. but, two, it also is one of those things that we got to make sure happens in the light of day. and so to speak to your direct question about the ways we can see a.i., obviously there is an appetite or a growing desire for the railroads to eliminate onboard crew staff, on the locomotives and the trains being operated. you look at the technologies being developed and the tacks that they're equip -- tasks that they're equipped to do and the way the railroads are approaching it, you can see the writing on the wall for automation. very quickly, as an example, c.s.x. recently put out a letter to their training mentors that they are encouraged to reduce training time where p.t.c. is present simply because they feel

as though it relieves some of the pressure put on the conductor and that's not true. when we're talking about artificial intelligence, it is deployed in the railroad and to the point, we do have these car portals, we do have track inspection. but it's not being communicated to the people that need it most and that's the workers. i'll give you two very quick examples. in lexington, kentucky, a few weeks ago, we had a derailment. technology that was deployed on a locomotive that is there through a.i. to scan the track identified a defect in the rail. and said basically there was a wide gauge that was about to happen and that defect went unacted on for five days. and sure enough, a derailment occurred on that exact point of that rail where the a.i. detected it. to the flip side of that, when you talk about car portals in nebraska we had a train with a broken wheel that was a system train that went back and forth. there was at least five times that train and that particular car with the broken wheel went through the car portal and it was identified. we have the pictures.

but it wasn't acted upon on the railroad until the actual wheel failed and we had a derailment that we went to it. so when we develop new technology, we have innovation, we have to make sure, to congressman nehls' point and moulton's point, that the information is going to where it needs to go. not just to a back room or a closet where it's hidden in the dark, but to the employees that hold that responsibility and hold that accountability to make sure that they stay safe, that the public stays safe and that we're doing the right thing. a.i. is important. but it's got to be done in the light of day. ms. foushee: thank you for that. mr. chairman, that's my time. i yield back. >> the gentlelady yields back. mr. burlison: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. baker, you didn't mention my district so i'll say, southwest missouri, there are 315 miles of track that's owned or operated by shoreline and regional rail.

and you emphasized in your testimony that -- these are small businesses. i mean, it's thrown out, big, big corporations, but, no, these are small businesses. and i think small businesses are the backbone of the american economy. vital to every state, including the state of missouri. that being said, what -- if you had to rank in order the most egregious, the most burdensome andry dick louis -- and ridiculous regulations that your industry faces, what are the top three? mr. baker: well, first of all, i apologize for not mentioning your district. i would have loved to but i found congress is very strict about the five-minute -- mr. burlison: you're welcome to come to southwest missouri. it's beautiful. mr. baker: i will happily accept that invitation. i would love to join. maybe combine it with a visit to the chairman's district also. mr. burlison: sounds good. mr. baker: boy, the most egregious. i will say, one, which is really

more kind of red tape than a regulation, but on the chrissy grants, whether they come, there are recipients of the grants who just ask for permission to use pre-award authority, that's basically to spend their own money at risk before the grant gets finalized, just so they can get things going, buy materials, for instance, hire engineers, hire contractors, start the work. it's hard to get authority for the pre-approval. for the life of me, i cannot figure out why that is anything other than an easy yes almost instantaneously. that's one. conductor, dispatcher certifications, dispatcher and signalmen certifications is a new rule that is coming that i believe is a textbook example of solving a problem that just doesn't exist. there's no data, no reason to believe that we had dispatchers

or signalmen who are untrained or undertrained or causing accidents because of a lack of training. we find the certifications to be -- mr. burlison: it seems you're employing these individuals and if they're not doing a good job, then they're not going to have that job, right? mr. baker: that's right and there's perfect alignment of incentives. it's not like there's some world where we wouldn't want our own employees to be trained to do the job. mr. burlison: anybody that understands licensure laws and certification laws understands it's all about reducing the number of people that are eligible to work. right? so you can drive up labor costs. this is what happens in the health care system. every work labor-related industry that wants to impose government certification requirements is just about reducing the labor pool. mr. baker: yes. mr. burlison: i wanted to ask, i believe mr. jefferies, in your testimony you highlighted the importance of congress to oppose

policies that harm the railroads' ability to operate safely and efficiently. such as requiring a two-person crew and freight locomotive cabs, which there's been zero quantitative evidence that a two-person crew would mandate actually enhance safety. so could you highlight what is the impact and the effect in the industry that this two-person rule has? mr. jefferies: as i mentioned at the outset, locking in current operating practice in petter fought toy in our view is never a goody and industries that continue to evolve, whether it's the rail industry or any other industry, your point is spot-on. there's absolutely no data to show that that regulation advances safety. in 2016 the obama administration and its preamble acknowledged thatment. in 2019 when the trump administration withdrew it, they acknowledged as much.

in 2020, on the campaign trail, president biden made a campaign promise that he was going to put the rule back out. he did. still a lack of data. technology has only continued to advance. p.t.c. has only continued to advance. our view that, look, train constant has always been a matter of collective bargaining between us and our employees. that's where it should be. there's no data to support another outcome. and we think locking in current operating practice is counterintuitive to the continued progress of the industry, especially when, especially when one of the core priorities identified by our employees is establishing more of the work-life balance. and when we can create a scenario when an employee works a scheduled shift, goes home to bed in their home every night, we believe there's opportunities to continue to have that conversation with our unions, to see if there are agreements that can be met in certain situations. mr. burlison: thank you. my time has expired. i yield back.

mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, gentlemen. i want to start on a place i think around safety where we agree in the industry. mr. deluzio: the long line railroads and short line. railroad crossing information. for folks at home, it's a pretty important program that can fund safety improvements at rail crossings. i'll talk about my district in western pennsylvania. nearly half of my constituents live within a mile of the tracks. 95% or so live within five miles. i hear from local government all the time about concerns in safety issues around crossings. chess wick this my district, home to a crossing with the second highest accident rate in the northeast united states. keys rocks in my district, fifth worst rate in pennsylvania.

so i see you both nodding, you agree this program is important, can help improve safety for the big railroads and the same question about your railroads? mr. jefferies: 100%. we supported it in development of the iija and we look forward to supporting it in the next re-authorization effort. mr. baker: the program works. i think we only all wish there could be more of it. the biggest challenge with grade separations is just they're quite expensive. mr. deluzio: it's not hypothetical in my district or many of my colleagues', this is a risk to our communities. i hear from so many local officials about this problem. we need to make sure we continue to fund this in a real way. maybe we aren't going to agree so much, broader rail safety efforts that have been quite bipartisan. i commend mr. nehls from texas, mr. moulton, mrs. sykes, mr. ruli. east palestine, almost two years

ago, yet we haven't had congress take any action on rail safety. that is unacceptable to me and my constituents. i've heard mr. ruli talk about his constituents in east palestine. hive heard from it -- i've leader it from vice president vance and the prior administration. they support these rail safety efforts and yet nothing's happened. i don't accept that. and i guess a simple part of this is whether we're going to trust the rail industry to regulate themselves. you work in this industry. do you trust the railroads to regulate themselves? mr. cassity: unfortunately i do not. they make a lot of unilateral changes quite regularly that are the outcome of external pressures. whether that be wall street or scheduling or whatever that may be. and they find ways to capitulate to those pressures which unfortunately end up cutting corners and that affect our people.

whether you look at long trains and the scheduling, when you look at attendance policy, all of these things have impacts on the workforce and ultimately the service. two-person crew, if they have their way, he just said it, they don't feel the need to keep the conductor. but if we remove the conductor off the cab of the locomotive, we do have a history that shows two-person crews and the conductor deliver a level of safety. to remove that person, you are going to equate to risk. you're going to bring a new risk into it. so we got to make sure that we have guidelines and guard rails that we're doing the right things because they're going to have impacts on the american public. and when you look at attendance policy, just an example. last week i believe it was, maybe two, bnsf decided to cut and slash their attendance policy without any conversation or consideration. work-life balance is being used up here as though it's a gift but it's not a givment it's a hammer over our workers' head. so we've got to make sure that we're doing the right things for the workers and the american public. we want and need the railroads to succeed.

please don't get me wrong. rich railroads work well for our membership. successful railroads work well for our membership. we need them to do the right thing. but unfortunately we cannot trust them to do that because there are pressures that they capitulate to and we can't account for that. mr. deluzio: you made a point about railroads succeeding being good for your members and being good for our country. we have to move goods safely and quickly. i'm not willing to use my constituents as collateral damage in the way of profits. we have to move things on the rails safely. and to the point of trusting the railroads to regulate themselves, in the year after the derailment, class one railroads derailment rate increased. i'll read you a quote about those figures. quote, these figures show the railroads industry safety standards are getting worse, we can reverse the trend by passing the railroad safety act immediately. that was senator vance who is now our vice president. let's pass the legislation, protect my community, protect communities like ours all over

the country mr. chairman, i yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. wanted to ask a few questions of mr. jeffries and mr. baker of the i certainly share your perspective. it was important that carb withdrew their petition to implement an unworkable end-use locomotive rule and i think that's important for our supply chain. mr. fong: wanted to ask if there were other state or federal policies that are going to hinder rail operations in california specifically. mr. jefferies: thank you for the question. if i could just comment quickly. 2022, the 2023 derailment rate was significantly lower than 2022, in the first 10 months of 2024t lower than 2023. 2.77 incidents per million train miles.

that's not good enough, it should be zero. but progress continues to be made on that front. i wanted to make sure the record reflected that. and thank you for your support on the misguided efforts. you're a leader in the efforts in calling out the, while noble in the in purr seurkts the complete unrealistic attempt and illegal attempt for card to do what it did. look, at the end of the day, california and carb in particular, they seem to be a model for bureaucratic overreach time and time again. our concern, especially when it's a rail industry, if carb acts and they're allowed to act, that's not a state regulation. it's effectively a federal regulation because we're a nationwide interconnected network. now, fortunately that's why the s.t.b. has strong, strong, strong preemption authority and that was the second law that carb was violating trying to regulate this.

but i'd be happy to sit down with your team and get into more specifics on individual regs but thank you for your support on the emissions piece. mr. fong: thank you. >> i would say the carb rule was so egregious and kind of terrifying for the short line industry about essentially threatening to put us out of business, we are again thrilled that it was withdrawn and appreciate your support in particular on helping with that. mr. baker: i do think that congress would be wise to consider taking a look at the clean air act and the authority that's given to carb and changing at least limiting that in scope so that at least on industries that are clearly meant to be regulated at the federal level, not the state level like railroads, that we can't revisit this nightmare the next time they have an administration that might be willing to approve such a waiver. mr. fong: certainly we all know that rail is a key component of the supply chain. that is not only in california

but across the country. that's part of our concern about carbs' rule. i did want to ask, how can freight rail infrastructure be expanded or optimized to accommodate the increasing demand and supply chains and capacity? of course, what are the key rail corridors in california that can be improved? how can we expand rail capacity at the ports to create some coordination? to reduce congestion and improve the flow of goods? mr. jefferies: one of the common themes we've heard is through sensible permitting reform, to let dollars get put to work more quickly, in a more efficient way. and that's really just about setting timelines, recognizing what should be pre-existing shod pre-existing categorical exclusions. in our ports we've seen

significant efforts to increase inform sharing. that's key. the intermodal gateway in southern california, a massive investment occurring. getting that approved so it can be built quickly. get those containers out of the southern california basin quickly, let them be built into trains and dispersed throughout the country out in a big, open space. key. there's other massive projects like that and really the surface transportation board who i mentioned before, exercising its preemption authority over both rail projects and our customers' projects. mr. baker: i'd add again, at the risk of harping on it, the chrissy program is extraordinarily effective in investing in short line infrastructure, including in california, the sierra northern recently received one for building out a big rail loading yard and so further support of programs like that and having it move faster i think will accomplish exactly what you're

looking for. mr. fong: appreciate that. i think my time is running out but i appreciate the work that's being done in the rail industry to move our products and our goods across the country and get them from the ports to our homes and businesses and farms. so thank you and i yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. mr. garcia, you're recognized for five minutes. mr. garcia: thank you, mr. chairman. and ranking member. to our witnesses here today, i represent chicago. the nation's busiest freight hub. one of every four u.s. freight trains passes through chicago. that's about 500 freight trains and 800 passenger and commuter trains every day. i was glad to see that the chicago region environmental and transportation efficiency program better known as create received two important grants from usdot. nearly $300 million will go to improvements and a three-mile

elevated rail corridor on chicago's south side and another $43 million will be invested on building a grade separation along 65th street and harlem avenue, across the street from my district. together this funding will help relieve congestion along chicago's rail network, improve supply chain efficiency, and make communities safer as well. this is made possible through the collaboration between public sector and class-1 railroads. can you speak about how important programs like create are for our national rail and freight network? mr. jefferies: thank you for that question. it was great to see you at the event in december on the south side of chicago. it's critically important and create is the model program for the rest of the country and we often get approached from other communities of, hey, we want to do a create and we explain the commitment from not only the freight railroads but the commuter railroads, amtrak, the

city, the county, the state. the usdot. and how we've all worked together to identify a discrete set of very large projects that different parties benefit from at different times, but everyone has skin in the game. everyone has maintained a commitment. absolutely critically important and we're thrilled with the outcome of last fall's awards. and i'll just give you a quick example. our leader of create in chicago is invited to southern california to talk about the create program and he said it dawned on him that the close to 100 officials who were there representing local governments, it was probably the first time they'd been in a room together. and so the amount of coordination in chicagoland is to be applauded and something we're very proud of. mr. garcia: let's keep it going, by all means. mr. cassity, changing gears. i appreciate you mentioning high speed rail in your testimony. thousands of miles of railroad tracks crisscross chicago, making rail essential to supporting a robust economy in

the midwest. it supports thousands of good paying union jobs, it connects small towns to big cities and people to schools and jobs and connects businesses to commodities as well. that's why high speed rail is an exciting prospect for the midwest. not only would it spur economic development, it would lower carbon emissions and create thousands of good jobs. a commissioner in illinois is currently studying the chicago to st. louis route and will produce a statewide plan. can you address how transformational a high-speed rail system in the midwest would be and what role can the federal government play to support development plans for high speed rail? mr. cassity: sure, thank you for the question. high speed rail would be absolutely transformational for the rail industry and for all the reasons that you addressed. the efficiency and the effectiveness and the benefits for the american public are exponential and hard to be quantified in such a short statement like this. but for the rail workers as well, to know that we would have

the opportunity to see the economy and the infrastructure grow is something that we haven't seen for a long time. that's why bright line west is so encouraging. because the more we look at transportation in our country, the more we recognize that the highway system isn't doing what it's supposed to be doing anymore. that it's too crowded, that it's not efficient as the way it should be. high speed rail gives us the opportunity to say alleviate a lot of those pressures but we need the government's help to encourage those construction projects. we need the government's help to fund those projects and we need the government's buy-in on the rail industry to make sure we're expanding that. kind of like what's been talkedd about already this morning is that for whatever reason, and i know mr. jefferi serves s talked about this isn't your grand dad's railroad, but we've been in the background so long that the public don't view it as the next step. for some reason aviation gets this whatever put on it to make it seem as though that is the ultimate future.

but the ultimate future doesn't have to be there. we have opportunities in the rail space to take people where they're not easily able to go, smaller route, longer route, faster routes. high speed rail is absolutely critical in development for our country and we just need the government's buy-in and we need financial support and support across the board. mr. garcia: thank you, sir. mr. chair, i yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, mr. chair. my first question is to mr. baker. so, mr. baker, you noted in your testimony that 100% of alaska's rail is short line rail. alaskans have long sought a rail connection that would tie alaska to the rest of the north american rail network. mr. begich: in your view what steps should we consider to support such a connection? mr. baker: that's a fabulous question. the current route of connecting is quite elaborate, involves ferries and it's not sort of

realistic for where i think you would like to take the state and the country. a project like that is really a megagrant and so i think it would be important for congress to continue grant programs like infra and raise and mega that really contemplate some of these -- maybe not quite moon shot, but big-deal infrastructure programs. dollar lot of -- there are a lot of short line projects, including some on of the existing alaska, where $20 million can really move the dial and we do a lot of those and we're really proud of that. a project like you're talking about is sort of exponentially more than that. i do think that the country and the people of the country have appetite for that, that sort of thing, and the project you're talking about is a great example. i'd be thrilled to support it. mr. begich: thank you. this is a question for

mr. jefferies. in your testimony, you mentioned that in real terms, inflation adjusted real terms, costs of moving freight on rail have declined by 42% since 1980. do you have any information, and if not, could you at some future time provide this committee with information, on what has happened to the cost of new rail construction over that same period of time? has that also trended down or has that gone up in real terms? mr. jefferies: i wish. unfortunately no. it hasn't. due to cost of materials, due to inflationary pressures, as every other industry has seen. and if i could be so bold, i would expect my colleague can comment on it a little more sophisticatedly than i might be able to. mr. daloisio: no, definitely. thank you, congressman. so material pricing has gone up. labor pricing has gone up. equipment pricing. everything has gone up

exponentially. we talked earlier about the grant time process, about these grants. so a lot of times contractors and our consulting engineer members are involved in the initial stages of putting together budget pricing for some of these grants and we do that with good faith, hoping, you know, that they're going to escalate maybe a year out. and then we get a call three years later that, hey, the grant got approved and the price now is 1/3 of what it should be. so, yes, to answer your question, everything is -- we see that continually going up. mr. begich: this is a question for anyone who might have an answer to it. do you have any suggestions on how we can drive down the cost of new rail construction? mr. jefferies: not to hit on the same theme but i would say, getting projects approved more quickly to allow that money to be put in the ground more quickly. not to circumvent any appropriate review, but let's just put some certainty into the process so that the money you have now is used and you don't need twice as much 10 years from

now when the project's approved. mr. daloisio: to chime in there. with new technology, especially on the contracting side, whether it's new tools or equipment that's helping us be more efficient and be able to build track faster, that definitely is a way to lower the cost. mr. begich: very good. does anyone here today know how the tier 1 network was originally financed? was it government grants, private money? mr. jefferies: the ultimate public-private partnership. mr. begich: ok. i think it's fantastic that we're hear being high speed rail, rail that goes 200 miles per hour. it's great for passengers. there's a lot of innovation on the freight side. let's connect alaska to the north american rail network so that we can be a part of this same success story. thank you and i yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back.

mr. cohen, you're recognized. mr. cohen: thank you. thank you. the infrastructure investment and jobs act also known as the ilja, also known as the bipartisan infrastructure bill, also known as the biden infrastructure bill, i'd prefer to call it the biden-cohen bill, has provided an unprecedented opportunity to modernize our rail system, strengthen our economy and improve connectivity for millions of americans. one program i'd like to highlight is the corridor identification and development also known as the corridor i.d. program, which is awarded $500,000 to study the feasibility of passenger rail corridor, connecting memphis to nashville and then on to chattanooga and atlanta. this sunbelt atlantic connection will connect major population centers, fostering economic growth, and reducing traffic congestion in our region. tennessee is eager. also remain committed to enhancing the passenger experience on amtrak.

mr. garcia didn't mention the amtrak service that goes from -- through memphis into new orleans and as a kid i rode to the city of new orleans and we went up to chicago quite a few times and down to new orleans as well. we've had great food on some of those, particularly the panama limited. they had the best service, pullman train, but they had big thick steaks and french toast and they don't have that anymore. so i've introduced two bills, the train food act and the train eat act, which aims to restore and improve onboard dining services on long distance routes, i think would improve the experience and the ridership. when re-authorizing surface transportation programs for amtrak, we must not neglect the passenger experience, quality of dining service is essential to attracting riders, making rail travel enjoyable. an alternative to driving and flying. i want to address the pressing issue in america and in memphis. cargo theft. unfortunately memphis, which has a large logistics hub, has seen

cargo theft spike alarmingly in recent years, posing threats to businesses and supply chains. addressing this problem is not just a local concern, it's a national concern and i believe mr. jefferies and mr. baker discussed trucks and your competition with trucks. obviously you don't like trucks. trucks have 80% of the cargo thefts. you'll like that. but it's a great problem and memphis were trying to deal with it. we need more solutions. mr. jefferies, the f.b.i. has developed a task force of the u.s. marshall service and police. what additional areas of collaboration could be established between freight railroads, law enforcement and other stakeholders to enhance preemptive measures and combat cargo theft on trains? mr. jefferies: thank you for highlighting that. that's a priority of ours, is making headway. because not only is it an issue in memphis, it's an issue across several parts of the country and the epitome of interstate crime.

t.s.a. federal issue -- it is a federal issue that we need federal attention to. one of the most frustrating things we've seen is that arrests are made and prosecutions don't occur. and that's why we're advocating and hopefully this task force will draw some attention to getting some resources behind prosecutions and putting folks behind bars and moving up the chain. because this is absolutely an organized effort. the sophisticated effort. and railroads are investing on their own to increase deterrence, increase monitoring and vigilance. but it's going to take everybody working together because the problem's not going away and we'll look forward to partnering with you on this. mr. cohen: thank you. in the 1880's, when jesse and frank were doing their jobs on the trains, the trains jumped into it and hired the pinkertons. you need to get the 21st century pinkertons on this. >> if i may, congressman, we certainly view trucks as our big competitors. but we would absolutely view -- we are on the same page as them on cargo theft issues.

mr. baker: we would not wish theft on even our harshest competitors. mr. cohen: but if you had a choice. mr. baker: please stay away from the trains, yes. mr. cohen: right this corridor i talked about, memphis on to atlanta, could do a lot to improve congestion and the environment as well. wie reducing emissions. how can freight rail partners work with passenger rail projects to advance these climate goals and equitable development? mr. jefferies: when we've seen these projects work well, of which there are numerous examples around the country, all stakeholders get together at the front end and sit down and talk about desired outcomes and so that's the municipality, that's the state, that's the passenger entity. that's the effective freight railroad and talk about, ok, what do we want to achieve? what capacity is necessary? what investment is necessary to ensure that capacity? and who is going to pay for it? and so -- mr. cohen: i have four seconds. i want to ask mr. cassity

something. you talked about the ultimate future and where we should look at transportation. elon says it's mars. should we put all that money into plan planting a flag on mars or maybe do it somewhere like memphis? mr. cassity: thank you for the question. i'm intrigued by the thought of going to mars, but the reality is when we're talking about investments in taxpayer money, the investments here in the country and the biggest benefit is moving them to where they need to go safely and efficiently. and there's no better opportunity than the railroad system and high speed rail in my opinion is the greatest opportunity for funding to do something meaningful for the people of america. to make an impact on the economy and the infrastructure as a whole. mr. cohen: thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. webster: the gentleman yields. mr. kennedy, you're recognized for five minutes. mr. kennedy: thank you, chair webster and ranking member titus. appreciate uconn convenienting this committee and thanks to the witnesses. you've been here for a while and

i appreciate your willingness to illose date these important issues. you went to basin railway as an important project in utah's third district and it's my district as home, this major oil fields. there's several crude by rail projects in the works in my district and that is one of them. and it's an opportunity for us to reduce truck traffic on dangerous roads. these are mountain roads with terrible weather sometimes. and move that crude oil out of the basin and move goods into the basin. so with that in mind, mr. baker, i was interested in your take on this. what are some of the major regulatory issues that face the railroad industry generally as it relates to american energy and what steps we can take to enhance energy dominance in the united states of america and utah, my congressional district specifically? mr. baker: the basin project is very exciting. it would be served by a short line railroad which would then connect to union pacific and connect it to the world. there was a big regulatory

threat to that particular project, as you know. the s.t.b., surface transportation board, approved it with its environmental analysis. it was extremely exhaustive and i thought impressive analysis. and then a court overturned it and said that they didn't properly consider essentially the down stream effects of how the oil would be used, which ian referenced a similar issue earlier today. that was just reargued in front of the supreme court and i think the outcome is heading in a direction that makes sense, where the reviews will now be limited and this is to answer your question, the important outcome is that reviews be limited to the actual project rather than sort of a holistic view of how every commodity is going to be used because if we do that, then we'll never build anything and there are frankly not a lot of brand new rail lines that get built in this country. that one is an exciting one.

i'm sure his members would be very excited to get to work building it and we're exaited to get to work moving it and the folks in the basin are excited to get to work selling it and probably most importantly, this stuff already moves, like you said, on trucks on dangerous mountain roads, moving it by rail is a better outcome for literally everybody. >> thank you. can you tell us if you were able to participate in that railway? mr. daloisio: thank you. could you please repeat that? >> what would that mean to you if we could -- you and your industry, if we could actually enhance and start to build that railway that we're seeking to build there in my district? mr. daloisio: thank you. it means a lot. our member companies are all -- a lot of them are small, family-owned companies. a lot of them are larger companies but to get those funds, to be able to get those projects and get involved. i mean, all that money that is spent to get those companies out there, get the workforce on the

ground, get their equipment on the ground, start laying material, that all trickles down to feed their families. it's so vital. we have so many members across the country who are itching to build more track. we need help to be able to do that and do it safely and get those trains on them and get them moving. mr. kennedy: we're itching to help you accomplish that goal. it would be outstanding for us. i ha question for you as to -- along these lines. efforts to cut red tape associated with these infrastructure projects. approval and construction have been successful in recent years. but what more can still be done to fast track routine maintenance and replacement construction projects without ignoring environmental or historical preservation concerns? mr. jefferies: thank you for the question. so two things. one, and congress has already told the advisory committee to do this. provide the same categorical exclusions to replacement of historic asset as you do highways. congress has spoken twice on

this. the independent agency has not yet acted. maybe third time's a charge. charm. and then you gave me the answer with your question. for routine maintenance and replacement, again, categorical exclusions that limit the actual construction versus that which knows over it, versus other extraneous activities. mr. kennedy: thank you for those responses and thank you all for being here with us. mr. chair, i yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. mr. johnson, you're recognized for five minutes. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you, madam ranking member, for hosting this critical hearing today. and thank you to the witnesses for your time and for your testimony. the united states leads the world with the most extensive rail transport network, spanning approximately 160,000 miles. many of our communities, especially in regions like my home state of georgia, started with a railroad stop.

entire towns were built around these vital pieces of infrastructure because we understand their importance. yet today it operates without consistent long-term funding required to maintain and expand this essential infrastructure. as we all know, climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and rail emerges as a transformative solution. our system provides the safest, most energy efficient and environmentally sustainable mode of transportation. while alleviating traffic congestion and reducing reliance on fossil fuels, rail plays a vital role in creating a cleanlier future. its ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions surpasses road and air transport. without the security of long-term funding, however, it's a challenge to build on the progress achieved from long ago and through president biden's

bipartisan infrastructure law. mr. cassity, expanding and modernizing our rail network to reach more communities with improved service means creating good paying jobs, fostering domestic mothering, and ensuring -- manufacturing, and err suring to -- ensuring our infrastructure meets the demands of the 21st century. this effort requires significant investments in projects all across the country. with funding such as the 52.79 billion dollars allocated by the federal railroad administration for 594 safety rail improvement projects. can you explain what it would mean for communities if funding -- if federal funding like this was not available? >> sure. thank you for the question. mr. cassity: i knew at one point i was going to get an economical question. i want to remind everybody, i'm a locate motive engineer.

but railroading is an industry worth investing in. we're absolutely critical to moving forward with everything that we do, whether it's passenger or freight. there was discussion about the basin. we as labor support the notion that there is no safer or better way to move commodities on the planet earth than through our rail system. so everything that we depend on, on our day to day live, the food in the stores, the technology in best buy or wherever you may go, odds are that's touched a train at some point. so if we don't fund the railroad systemically, we stand to lose a lot of the benefits we have in our daily lives. and on the flip side of that, we also stand the opportunity to not have the safest work environment that we should have. funding allows us to do all of the right things and to expanned in a world where we need expansion so that we can make things easier to get to, so that we can have products more readily available and hopefully cheaper to buy. mr. johnson: and you create more economic development. more jobs.

mr. cassity: absolutely. you create more jobs, you have more workers, you have more good-paying jobs and in turn it recycles all of the good benefit that was pay out to everybody. mr. johnson: thank you. it's been said at this hearing, mr. cassity, that the number of derailments has gone down over the last few years. but according to the federal railroad administration data, the number of derailments has increased year over year. in 2021, 2022 and 2023. mr. cassity, as congress and the new administration prepare for the new surface transportation bill, what key protections should be prioritized to enhance rail safety for workers and passengers? mr. cassity: sure. there's a lot. and basically i'll start with the rail enhancement safety act, that congressman nehls introduced last year. it hit a lot of those priorities that we need to do to make sure that safety is heading down the right path. the data in this industry obviously can be interpreted

differently. clearly mr. jeffries and myself are of different opinions on where we're at with the derailment rate or frequency in this country. but we need to take a real look at what's going on and not accept that, you know, we are increasing or we are running flb flat, we're not doing enough to stop these accidents. to rank member titus' point earlier, you know, our organization personally went on nine investigations with the national transportation safety board, all of those are indicative of the fact that we need to do more with safety in the rail space. we need to take a look at the crew staffing we. need to take a look at long trains and technology and detectors and do a lot of things to make sure the innovation is welcome in the industry, but it's done so in a way that others have the ability to make an input that's in the interest of all stakeholders, but then we put the proper guidelines where we need to, to ensure that minimum level of safety, allow them to do the development they need to do in

the interest of workers and public, but we can collaborate on that. we have to collaborate on that. and i do think that's our challenge going forward. johnson thank you. and appreciate -- mr. johnson: thank you. and i appreciate the grace of the chair and yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. mr. stowb stawber -- stauber, you're recognized for five minutes. mr. stauber: thank you. mr. cassity virks to correct you. you said you're just a railroad engineer. no. you're more than that. you're an expert. that's why you're here today. that's why you're sharing your vision of a safer, more reliable railroad. so please accept my correction, you're more than just a railroad engineer. and we appreciate you all. mr. jeffries, you know, i had some comments here prepared. but you talked about some very important things, nepa reforms and railroad construction and fixing -- why would you -- why do you have to wait seven to nine, 11 years for the government to, you know, put forth their ok for you to move forward with construction?

that's all money and all time that's unnecessary. and so i'm going to encourage you, as this next congress gets going, we're going to look at nepa reviews. and you said something that i totally agree with. we're not cutting corners. we're going to keep the same environmental standards, same labor standards on these projects. we care about the environment too. so, that, i think, you all can have a strong voice in those reviews. so please be present and we may ask you to be a witness and such. it should not -- and i'll go to the mining issue for just one moment. it takes on average 29 years to open a mine in the united states of america. canada and australia and others, two to three years. come on. we can do better than that. and i ask for your professional voices during that time. you also talked about

prosecutions and arrests. so being a former law enforcement officer, that's one of the things that frustrated me the most, and it still frustrates the american law enforcement community. you could have your railroad police arrest these organized criminals, and they get a slap on the hand, even if that. and they're out the next night doing the same thing to your rail cars. stealing the products off there. and so if we don't have prosecutions, it's going to continue and continue and continue. i hope and i trust that this new administration, they're going to crack down on rail thefts because it's getting big. and you all know that. i mean, you're adding more railroad police, etc. but i'm one to stand with you on the prosecutions because when we don't prosecute that, guess who pays more for the end product? we the american people. and so i'm with you on that.

i want to saying is that i think is really important. i came from the county government in northern minnesota. when we had issue withs railroad crossings or safety, the community and the rail professionals always were there to help us out. to make sure that that crossing was the safest it can be. i want to just tell you that i understand safety is our first, second and third priority, not only for the public, but for the passengers, etc. so i've been on this community since -- this committee, rather, since day one. and we're all almost on the same page. and when we do that, we can move mountains. and i think that as we continue in this congress, let's have that discussion. because i think rail is a huge part of our mode of transportation. amongst others, right? i mean, we have room for the

aviation community, certainly aviation. we have room for using our ships and ports, etc. certainly we can do that. and i would be remiss if i stint say that duluth, moalt, has the most -- minnesota, has the most inland port in the country. with that being said, we also -- when we look at passenger safety, crew safety, etc., we're also, i think, where we can up it a little bit is training for our first responders across the nation. because if there's an incident, it's oftentimes in the rural communities where those first responders are the first ones there. we have to really get really good at notifying and preparing and training for our rural first responders and that includes our native american communities because we're going through a lot of tribal lands too. we need to make sure that we prepare them so that in case there is an incident, that we're well prepared and that we can reduce the harm.

for a legislator like me, i'm looking at all of you for that expertise and advice so when we talk about rail safety, when we need that legislation, you're at the table. i appreciate the expertise in this panel. and thank you for your time, for coming this afternoon. mr. chair, i yield back. mr. webster: the gentleman yields back. mr. ryan, you're recognized for five minutes. mr. ryan: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm excited to join this subcommittee for the first time and thank you to the ranking member as well. thank you to our witnesses for now many hours of your time this morning. i proudly represent the hudson valley region which is north of new york city. significant amount of railroad traffic, both freight and passenger, including 123 miles of c.s.x. frayed on the west side of the hudson river. many areas and crossings specifically in my district, as has been discussed. desperately need safety

enhancements and investment and redesigns from traffic signal upgrades to prevent congestion backups, roadway redesigns and enhanced warning system, even basic signage which we're lacking at many of these crossings. for example, a town in my district, which is an entirely ungated crossing, lacks any warning lights and in 2017 a constituent riding in a taxi was killed when her taxi driver missed the stop sign and drove right into the path of an oncoming train. a simple fix like warning signage would have helped avoid this tragic incident. c.s.x. operates, as i said, trains throughout many densely populated urban areas in my district. including the city of kingston, my hometown, which has 35 on average freight trains a day running through the heart of a pretty busy city, carrying a lot of things, but including waste, petroleum, industrial chemicals and other potentially harmful substances. ...

we greatly approach the role c.s.x. plays in our economy as we discuss it here but it's been a repeated point of challenge. i was in county government to get cooperation from c.s.x. and work with that and continue to focus on that. in fact, in the town of olster last year, a constituent of mine was killed by a c.s.x. train due to a lack of pedestrian signage. i want to work in a bipartisan way in how to address things like this. an encouraging sign, you mentioned it in your written testimony, mr. jeffries, port jervis received a grant thanks to the funding of the bipartisan infrastructure legislation. this was another problematic situation and at an intersection where someone was struck and

killed and this funding will be a day changer to help address that. my first question is to you, mrn that point of the r.c.e. grants and other similar grants, can you talk about the value of that and ask your help to work at a local tactical level and constructive way to speed up all these? mr. jeffries: absolutely. pedestrian and motor vehicle crashes is a tough challenge to face. we've seen dramatic decreases in accidents and starts first of all with eliminating the crossing. so with the grant you referred to, that's huge. and while we wish we had endless sources of funds to separate all high impact crossings, the reality is we don't. so we have warning devices but

the section 130 driving program and public education through partners such as operation lifesaver which if you haven't done work with them, certainly would love to get you involved with that, making the public aware, when you see tracks, think trains and it's a common sense statement but not something that's a reality and would love to work with you in your office to continue to prioritize the two programs i mentioned and two, look for ways to further educate the public and get that out which. it's something we're making further progress on. rep. ryan: and it should not be

politicized and i know you said it in your written testimony and spoken, we can agree maintaining and bolstering funds to those programs benefits everyone including the industry so they're not having to invest fully on their own in that regard. i'm an irish catholic and do my best with your name, mr. diloiso. i apologize. but in terms of your membership and yourself and experience, what are the challenges that you all have faced in installing and driving through projects, say, we have funding, how do we drive through -- i got too excited and would love to follow up with you on follow-up questions. mr. diloiso: i am happy to talk to you and live near you supersouthern new jersey. rep. ryan: sorry to hear you're

from new jersey. chairman you're recognized. >> i'm from kansas. but we rely on rail and appreciate what you do. my state, we have 4600 miles of railtrack and runs the gamut. my district is the western 2/3 of kansas except the county i'm from, wichita. rep. mann: we need trains to get our agriculture from the fields and out. we appreciate what you do. this committee is getting ready to work on the transportation re-authorization which is a big thing we'll focus on. but for you, mr. jeffries, can you highlight the areas you think we should be targeting for improvements to ensure that goods, people, or ag products move safely and in an efficient manner. how would you like -- there will be limited resources but in your

view how should we target those funds? mr. jeffries: a few different things. one is maintaining the grant programs which have a strong bipartisan support in allowing our public partners and short lines to receive those funds on a-mile-per-hourity-based basis to invest and ex-fanned capacity to serve customers like all the good folks in your community. two, you can make those programs run better either by congress or the administration by getting dollars out the door more quickly. we talked about delays and permitting reforms, allowing projects and money to be put to work more quickly. on the operational side, creating a more outcomes based regulatory environment. i know there are different views on this but i think there is a lot of common ground about how do we achieve the best safety outcome in a way that allows for innovation and frees up the network and allows goods to continue to move and takes

people out of risky situations. and at the end of the day promoting american competitiveness in a way that encourages investment and encourages goods to move and encourages products to move out of your state and to other countries at the end of the day. we're not looking for funds but it needs to be fixed. rep. mann: we know they're all connected. kansas is served by 14 superregional railroads with 2,000 miles of track and what are the biggest barriers our short line operators are facing right now? >> the biggest barrier short lines face is a back of funds. mr. baker: and goes to the

origin story and the reason there are so many short lines in kansas, going back generations, those were the unprofitable, unloved marginal branch lines of larger railroads, luckily, rather than being abandoned they were sold to short lines and those folks are hustling, scrapping, working on every door and working every day to keep those railroads in existence and let them survive and thrive but we need help. we're not like class 1 totally sufficient but do need congress' help blessedly and congress has long been supportive of short line, particularly folks from kansas. now senator moran has been a long time very aggressive supporter of short lines and you have been, too. the chrissy program again is the single most important program under this committee's jurisdiction that really matters the short lines, nebraska, kansas, and carolina railroad, the south kansas and oklahoma

railroad have benefited from chrissy grants and short lines and more to come as long as we can keep that program going. rep. mann: when short lines don't function we can't get ag to the mouths to feed them. you can't move the fields but can you can move the products when they grow but i think about our family's farm, 130 years ago, if you go back on the abstracts, our home place, used to be home to the railroad, the federal government gave it to the railroad, me and other people settling kansas purchased that and that's what the railroad used to continue to fund building more track. so literally, you know, the railroads were instrumental in us building western kansas, building the midwestern portion of the country. thank you. i appreciate you being here and appreciate having this meeting and yield back my time.

chairman: the gentleman yields back. mrs. sykes recognized for five minutes. mrs. sykes: thank for holding us this hearing today kicking us off for this rail subcommittee hearing. rep. sykes: as you know february 3, 2023, with a norfolk southern train carrying hazardous materials de derailed with hazardous chemicals and it started to burn and sparked health concerns. what occurred in the two years following no one should have had to deal with the horror and fallout of a disastrous deratement which impacted this community and continues to impact this community. one of the things i did after being a member of congress in less than a month was introduce a bill with my colleagues from democrats and republicans from ohio, the rail act, which was a piece of legislation to address

the needs of the community, we hear from folks from east palace teen ohio and heard from labor unions and stakeholders and put this bill together to address the issue of rail safety. one of those provisions came from our governor, mike dewine, around the temperature threshold requirements for safety placards which we found in the subsequent report is the first responders went looking for the placards but they had melted and had no idea what they were dealing with. and you heard with my colleagues fromming it having to figure out a solution to this issue but yet we have no solution to this issue and people from east palestinian -- palestine and refused to act and the former

president didn't show up but the current president showed up and we don't have the needs for those who have had their lives turned upside down and affected by train derailments. and i was speaking to a law group and they asked me with the fact we have vice president vance who was the co-lead for the railway safety act, do you think we'll see train safety in the future? and my response was no. and they waited for me to say something else but my response was no because after ruining these people's lives in east palestine and constantly begging for hearings having two or three or four different versions of the bill trying to find a solution that would ultimately address the needs of everyone, we still have nothing. and has my colleague from pennsylvania said, i find that to be wholly unacceptable.

it's not acceptable to have not done anything for those in east palestine, ohio, and all across the country. i want to ask you, mr. jeffries, what would you be ok with? but my colleague had already asked and you answered the question so now i know. i am going to ask mr. cassity, what are some of the things you suggest we can do because at this point i just want you all to be on the record of expressing solutions that we can hear that we can put to paper and then we can implement and keep our community safe. mr. >> the purpose of a detect detector and lets you know if there are defects in the cars of the train and if there are trending indicators to give a head's up that something might be going wrong. and in the car if you have wheel bearings, if those bearings seize and temperature and metal on metal and friction takes

place and you have temperature that rises. historically, at least when i hired on in 2005, these defect detectors gave you audible warnings. when you hit one or when you started to go over one, it gave you an introduction, you know, c.s.x. milepost blah, blah, defect detector to let you know it's on. and if you went over it would sound an audible alarm and give you a closing announcement, defect c.s.x. milepost blah, blah, this is the defect. and they started turning off the entrance alarm and you didn't know if they were working or not working. and somewhere else along the way in the next step of the transition, railroads decided they didn't want to give the operating crew the information about the defects, that they were better suited to determine if it was a defect that should be reported or not and then we get into the temperature thresholds like you addressed. there should be a standard on those thresholds and a point you

need to say look, you've got to be notified of it. but congressman moulton's point, there's no reason we shouldn't be in a place technology doesn't exist that's providing real time information to the crew and cab of the locomotive because that's who needs the information. we're not going to keep operating the train when we know there's a problem behind us. we're the ones responsible for the operation and we're the ones whose lives are at stake and we want to make sure we get the job done the way we're supposed to. if there's one thing in east palestine we can fix is making sure the defect detectors are communicating. that they are relaying the information to the crew and the people that have to have it in real time and getting those things done but the rail safety enhancement act did approach a lot of those issues. rep. sykes: i know we're out of time but i'm on this committee to make sure we figure out solutions and implement them and look forward to working with everyone to do that and i yield back.

chairman: the gentlelady yields back. mr. burgess. rep. burgess: what priorities or revisions would you like to see in the surface transportation re-authorization legislation? mr. jeffries: fix the highway trust fund. our competitors are getting $3 billion for the infrastructure. rep. burgess: how do you suggest? mr. jeffries: e.m.t. with weight variance and there are pilot programs out there and it's the most equitable way to do it, too. no truck size in weight increases, three, maintain multimodel competitive grant programs for our public partners and short line colleagues. four, create an outcomes regulation based paradigm that focuses on safety outcomes versus inputs. named a few. permitting reforms, sensible permitting reform.

rep. burgess: we're government, we're not in the business of fixing things, we're in the business of making it worse. mr. jeffries: you asked. rep. bunchette: i appreciate that. the highway trust fund, tell me how it impacts the rail industry. mr. jeffries: freight railroads, class 1 railroads we pay for almost 100% of the funding of our infrastructure to the tune of when you account for inflation, $1.1 trillion of private funding since 1980. and we compete strongly against our trucking partners, they are partners but also competitors and operate over a public highway system woefully underfunded by the user fee structure and all that leads to as a competitive imbalance and look, i've heard the a.t.a. advocate for paying more into the system. i've heard countless stakeholders advocate for paying more into the system. we haven't had a change since 1993. think of how much inflation occurred and how much less the

dollar is worth now. mr. bunchette: mr. burg rep. burchett: i've heard about the bearings and packed them big and small and something everybody ought to do at some point. and have the federal regulations slowed the implementation of these technologies, mr. jeffries, simple yes or no. mr. jeffries: yes. rep. burchett: how have they used the safety improvement grants? mr. baker: yes, sir, chrissy allows us to do projects we simply couldn't afford. rep. burchett: what's the biggest barrier for that? mr. baker: the biggest challenge going forward is will chrissy continue to exist because the need exists and we need to make

sure in the next service re-authorization bill the program continues with advanced appropriations. once the grant has been given, the biggest barrier is just how slow it is to get from the award date is incredibly exciting and everyone is happy and there's a press release and press conference, and then the next couple years is sort of a painful slog of actually getting money in the ground of ties and rail and doesn't need to be that slow. rep. burchett: you think to improve that is to make it faster? mr. baker: yes, sir. rep. burchett: just call me tim. you get nowhere with signs of respect. mr. baker: noted. mr. burchett: has red tape interfered with the short line ability to build and i don't need the lawyer answer but the men sitting here talking answer.

mr. baker: the answer is yes, the red tape has slowed the process of building and there are simple things and i'm not even a lawyer so i won't give the lawyer answer. rep. burchett: you work for a living and choose not to steal is what you're telling me. mr. baker: permit by rule which is obviously a rehabilitation in an existing right-of-way, the answer is obvious, there's going to be no significant environmental impact, it's going to get a categorical exclusion and no need that process needs to take months or years and should be essentially instantaneous and also preaward authority, let us spend our own money at risk and then we can get the project going and then if you want to spend a few months arguing over paperwork, it's not as painful because at least we're making progress. rep. burchett: any of you gentlemen like to add something to that in the next 12 seconds. mr. diloiros: as a contractor we

want to give the contractors budget prices and sometimes years later they get the funding and now that budget price we gave three years ago it doesn't pay for the project anymore and we have to go for change orders and things of that nature so the timing really is an important thing. rep. burchett: mr. chairman, i yield back and would like to say for the record i have an intern with me named emma grace from nashville, tennessee, and she's wonderful. we hear a lot of bad things what's going on with our young people in this country and around a young person like that, it makes me feel a whole lot better where our country is headed. thank you, mr. chairman. chairman the gentleman yields back. ms. friedman, you're recognized for five minutes. rep. friedman: we've heard a lot about rail investments on farm and freight and that's wonderful and true. we've also heard about the need to find ways of funding our rail

infrastructure both for safety and economic development. and i want to bring up another facet to this which is important to my district which is housing. i represent los angeles, as you know we've been devastated by recent wildfires that left maybe 12,000 or more people homeless and that's running straight into a existing housing crisis that already had tens of thousands homeless in our community and many others facing severe overcrowding and thousands of people who can't afford their rent because of the housing shortage driving up the price of rent. to me it's been obvious many years working on transportation issues that we're not solving our housing prices in los angeles or many parts of our country without figuring out mobility. the first thing neighbors say when anyone wants to add housing in los angeles and many parts of the country, they're concerned about the impact on parking and traffic congestion which makes sense because we don't always

give people good options for good mobility and means for us to fix housing we have to fix transit and better invest in transit and rail, of course, plays a huge role in that in getting people to and from work which sometimes in los angeles can mean traveling many miles because people are priced out or working in areas they can't find housing. so that's the lens i'm looking at transportation investments through, that it's not just about moving freight, it's not just about moving from region to region but also solving our housing crisis which makes it even more important. the f.t.a.'s pilot program for transit oriented development, are d.o.t., planning helps create communities walkable and bikable and more connected. the bipartisan infrastructure law provided a 38% increase for d.o.t. programs. but transportation costs are one of the higher consumer costs we see and in 2023l.a. area households spent 16% of their

budget on average on transportation totaling almost $15,000 a year. for people transit dependent or can't afford a car or a variety of reasons they can't have a car we give them a miserable experience because we don't pay enough for transit because our formula from the federal government don't reflect the real need. i'm wondering and i guess i'll direct this to mr. cassity but can be any of you. how can the federal government be a better partner? i know funding is a part of it but i'm looking for ways to help support rail, rail expansion, upgrading rail, faster headways, and so is there something i should be looking at, certain programs i should be fighting for or policy changes that i can help push forward to help with francis in los angeles and across the country? mr. cassity: thank you for the question, congresswoman. i wish i was better equipped with the funding and all of it.

labor is fully on board with helping rebuild the l.a. community and anything we can do to encourage the growth or new introduction of transit and rail, we're 100% onboard. the one critique i would offer about government and its role in how we do that is just having an open communication and an honest conversation about what we can do to make things better, especially in the rail space. you know, safety for us is not a partisan issue. it should not be us versus them. it's simply one of those things we must accept and must strive towards. improving communities is one of those things we've got to be talking about. real world solutions that are doable and not worry building what party might do what. we've just got to get down to the fact we need to do what's right for the american public, we need to do with how they have an opportunity to get to work. i know it affects us all too well. i lived in the huntington, west virginia, area the last 15 years when i was elected to this position and moved here and

never was i smacked so hard in the face about the difficulties of transportation living in washington, d.c. and i understand the realities and challenges so i can't necessarily recommend the fundamentals but can tell you congress has to step in and you've got to figure out how to work together and just realize this is something we need desperately to make sure we get it done and let it roll. we're fully onboard to get over the finish line with that. >> first i would add my condolences to the l.a. community and i have friends and families that have lost homes and you do as well. absolute tragedy. a lot of it comes down to southern california is one of those parts of the country with so many different governments. mr. jeffries: we talked about a program in chicago called the create program where the city, county, state, freight rail, passenger rail, commuter rail have talked together about freeing up capacity and creating

more service. i think there's a real opportunity there to coordinate and identify shared priorities that will have the biggest impact for the whole community versus community by community. so i would encourage you to look at that program and how we might work to be a part of that sort of establishment moving down the road. >> we talked about the highway trust fund and we tend to approach that from the concept of freight and freight rail competing against trucks. mr. baker: i think our transit friends would have a similar vantage point on rail transit or even bus transit versus roads. and the reality is l.a. is very different than perhaps a rural area. in a rural area, perhaps the money is best used to expand the county road but in l.a. and new york, chicago, you cannot build your way out of traffic congestion by more roads, it doesn't work. you need to invest more in rail transit. rep. friedman: i yield.

chairman the gentlelady yields back. mr. taylor, you're recognized for five minutes. rep. taylor: thank for you holding this meeting and the witnesses that are here, i appreciate you very much. as it stands, ohio has 44 operating railroads and 5,000 miles of track making ohio the third largest rail infrastructure state in the nation. manufacturing steel and trade commends on connecting highways with international and global markets. as one of two ohioans serving on the rail subcommittee ensuring rail safety after the incident in east palestine is one of my top priorities. mr. diloiso, you mentioned how railroads across the country following east palestine implemented new safety measures to ensure derailments didn't occur again. can you go in further detail about specific safety measures the national railroad construction and maintenance association has taken to this point?

mr. diloiso: our association of contractors and engineers and pliers are looking at the hot box detectors and processing things. our contractors are constantly looking at safer and better and more efficient ways to fix the track and work with the operating railroads. our association, we started and have a robust safety committee which talks about constantly safer railroads and safer way to do things and safer procedures and we don't get into the actual operations of the trains, our contractor members help our class 1 and short line partners in making things safer. if it's insulation detectors or whatever new technology comes out there, we're onboard to help and support them and be a sounding board for them to advance some of these technologies. rep. taylor: thank you. mr. jeffries, we've heard

conflicting statistics of derailments of the five years. would you share your testimony earlier the rate of derailment is going down over the last few years? mr. jeffries: sure, i'd be glad to just to add on to my colleagues' comments. freight railroads took a number of steps as well and increased the number of weigh side as well, whether it's hot box or machine inspection portals or whether it's reducing absolute threshold on bearing increases, whether it's establishing new trending algorithms for troubling trends and increasing temperatures on bearings or whether making sure first responders have real time information. 2.3 million first responders have access to our real time app, shifting to the safety numbers. so we saw in 2023, employee injury rate was at the industry's all time low, we're a 200-year-old industry, all time low. final 2024 numbers haven't come in yet and we're neck and neck and slightly below and that's

through 10 months but hopefully the last two months will bear that out. any number above zero, we have a lot more work to do. on the derailment rate, rate is the key measure, rate. in 2023, the rate was 3.46 incidents per million train miles. so far in 2024, the number it 2.77 per million train miles. that's about zero. that's not acceptable. we have a lot more work to do but the vast majority of those incidents occur within the yard and the main line being those incidents and can result in tragedy and do and we've seen a downtick and those incidents include a rail coming off the switch so we cannot equate all

derailments. rep. taylor: many operate on existing infrastructure and i support investing in infrastructure but we have to be mindful of the deficit. consolidated rail infrastructure and safety improvements or chrissy grant programs seem to be transformative in repairing infrastructure without wasting taxpayer dollars. what's the biggest barrier for short line operators when they consider or apply for a chrissy grant at this time? mr. baker: i appreciate the underpinning. short lines we take pride in the fact they're very lean and no bureaucracy. if a short line gets $10 million or $12 million in a chrissy grant, that money goes right into the track. there's not big engineering studdies or layers of management to process it through. we feel very happy we can deliver government a good bang for the buck. the delays from announcement to

obligation is really the biggest hurdle to overcome and then of course making sure the program continues to exist because we have a lot more to go in ohio. we've made great progress but there's a lot more to do. rep. taylor: thank you again, mr. chairman. i yield back. chairman there nadler, you're recognized five minutes. rep. nadler: thank you. let me start by thanking chairman webster and ranking member titus for holding this hearing and the witnesses for appearing. before i go into my questions, though, i want to express my concern again about president trump's hastily and importantly drafted executive order that throws a substantial portion of critical bipartisan infrastructure law funding. despite the white house drafting memos and o.m.b. trying to clarify, states are still being told that their approved funding for bridges and highways is on pause.

our main concern the white house triggered a entirely avoidable crisis and urge the white house to finally clean up this mess. mr. jeffries, your testimony underscored the many advantages of rail rate in terms of trucking especially in efficiency and sustainability. it suggests increasing truck size and weight limits could divert as much as 20% of freight from rail to roads. can you elaborate on the potential consequences of such a shift for the communities we serve, including the strain on the nation's road and bridge infrastructure? mr. jeffries: thanks for the question and welcome back to the committee and thank you for your long-standing championship of this issue. the impact would be immense to put it lightly. we already have a highway trust fund underfunded by hundreds of billions of dollars. we've long since abandoned the user pays fees. our trucking partners operate

over infrastructure of which most estimates say they pay max 60% to cover the cost of the infrastructure damage. increasing truck weights would only exacerbate infrastructure damage, exacerbate congestion, more trucks moving up and down the i-95 corridor and i-81 corridor which when i'm on it i feel like i'm the only car driving on it, increased emissions. it's not good for customers, consumers, communities. it's not good for, frankly, society. and at the end of the day, from my perspective, and by the way, i know we've had our differences today but this is an issue i guarantee you every one of us sees eye to eye on and supports. at least there's a few things out there. but from my perspective, we're looking for a level playing field and we pay for our infrastructure and ask the competitors to pay for their infrastructure and let the chips fall to where they may but when you're subsidizing

infrastructure on hundreds of billions it flips the scale on its side and pushes freight where it's going to go to the cheapest level which is going to be the highways if it is allowed to increase weights at that level of subsidy. rep. nadler: does everyone on the panel agree with mr. jeffries on this? >> i do for sure and would note there's a huge safety concern which you all have pointed out, there are 40,000 people dead last year on the interstate highway system. mr. baker: we're used to that as a country because it happens every year for decades but that's a horrifying number and the fact anybody could look at that scenario and say well, what we ought to do is add bigger and heavier and more trucks to that. i don't think it makes a lot of sense. rep. nadler: mr. jeffries, your testimony mentioned the disparity of funding between rail and trucking. what can congress do to address this imbalance to ensure a fair

and competitive transportation market. mr. jeffries: first of all, don't make changes to truck size and weight. second of all, we've got to get ahold of how the highways are funded. it's got to be done by the user. i would just say it's not just the folks on this panel that share our concerns. it's truck drivers, there's a lot of trucking companies, to my knowledge, the a.t.a. is not advocating for this. this is a select group of schippers advocating for this. we believe citizens don't support it. we believe the vast majority of this country opposes any sort of change. rep. nadler: thank you. your testimony highlighted the infrastructure for rebuilding america which i was proud to help create a decade ago in the mega grand program. these initiatives have been instrumental in addressing critical infrastructure challenges nationwide and also represent vital funding opportunities for transformative projects like the cross harbor freight tunnel project which

will convert trucks to rate or rail and the movement of millions of tons each year through new york and new jersey. mr. jeffries, what steps can congress take to improve these grant programs to look at more transformative projects particularly in high need areas. mr. jeffries: i'll be quick, keep funding them, get the money out quicker and make sure distributions and awards are merit-based and finally, one application, one central application for all these different programs so folks don't have to reinvent the wheel every time they're applying for funding from different programs but fully support. rep. nadler: thank you, i yield back. chairman the gentleman yields back. don't see anybody that hasn't been recognized. thank the witnesses, thank you for coming. staying to the end to give us direct answers on all kinds of issues. and with that, the meeting's -- yes, go ahead. >> i heard several mentions of

cargo theft. we've been working on retail theft and that's much more than stealing a candy bar now. rep. titus: i expect there's some overlap of these circles involved in this. maybe we should put a roundtable together with the stakeholders and look at how we can do a concerted effort on this issue. >> we'd be happy to. rep. titus: thank you, mr. chairman. chairman webster: no one else is being asked to be recognized so the meeting stands adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] on wednesday, president trump's health and human services nominee rober f. kennedy jr. testifies at a senate finance committ confirmation hearing. he's an ement lawyer and

activist and also the 2024 independent presidential candidate and eventually withdrew from the race to endorse donald trump. n watch the hearing live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. then on thursday, mr. kennedy turns to capitol hill to take committee, live at 10:00 p.m.lth easter on c-span 3 and watch both hearings on c-span now, our free mobile video app or online c-span.org. >> sunday night on c-span's "q&a" part of our interview with our author nigel hamilton of "lincoln versus davis." and talks about the face-off between these two american presidents in the civil war and the impact the proclamation had on the impact. mr. hamilton: from that moment 1863 the south was doomed, until then jefferson davis had been

allowed by lincoln to frame the war as a noble white southern fight for independence, pure and simple. but from the moment lincoln said no, you, jefferson davis, and your commander in chief, robert e. lee, have attacked the north, which is what they did in september of 1862, the equivalent of pearl harbor, if you'd like. once you attack the north, you changed the whole game. >> nigel hamilton with his book "lincoln versus davis, sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&amendment. listen to all our podcasts on the free c-span now app.

>> c-span, democracy unfiltered. we're funded by these television companies and more. including wow. >> the world has changed. today a fast internet connection is something no one can live without. wow is there for our customers with speed, reliability and choice. now more than ever it all starts with great internet. >> wow supports c-span as a publicervice, along with these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> president trump met with families in north carolina who were affected by last year's hurricane helene as his first domestic trip before taking office. before meeting with local residents, the president also got a briefing from emergency responders on recovery efforts.